Post by account_disabled on Mar 13, 2024 2:06:09 GMT -5
The intervention of the Judiciary in issues relating to Regulatory Law must be considered, taking into account aspects of legality. For this reason, federal judge Helder Girão Barreto, from the 1st Civil and Criminal Court of Roraima, denied the request to annul a Resolution from the National Electric Energy Agency (Aneel) that readjusted energy tariffs.
According to the judge, "the review by the Judiciary of the criteria used for the tariff adjustment applicable to the public electricity service appears to be premature, in addition to undue interference in the public policy adopted by Aneel, when not demonstrated, in plan, the illegality in the local authority's option".
The Public Civil Action was B2B Lead filed by Procon and the Legislative Assembly of the State of Roraima asking for the annulment of Aneel Homologatory Resolution 2,336/17. According to the action, the measure is illegal because it does not follow the principle of reasonable tariffs and current legislation.
The injunction was denied. Afterwards, the state-owned Roraima Energia S/A contested that the "concession contract provides for economic-financial balance and that the Judiciary has no legitimacy to interfere in regulatory rules for setting or calculating tariffs".
Aneel, in turn, maintained that the publication of the resolution was "the result of detailed and careful technical work by the regulatory authority, guided solely by the pursuit of the public interest".
For case lawyer Thiago Lóes , from Décio Freire Advogados, the sentence reinforces the absence of illegality in the procedure adopted by Aneel. "The decision comes at an important time when, given the definition of distributors as an essential activity, it is necessary to search for the economic-financial balance of contracts, in the face of the pandemic", he states.